Tuesday, 29 September 2015

30 September 2015

Our foreign
policy lacks any commitment to human rights. A bold conclusion maybe, but the
most realistic one to be drawn from a couple of recent events where New Zealand
appears to have been caught on the hop.

First was the
appallingly tardy response to the Syrian refugee crisis. Even though the
mounting tragedy had been filling our television screens for some days, our
government appeared to miss its significance and any sense of obligation on New
Zealand’s part to assist. Indeed, it seemed to be only the strong public
reaction that finally jolted it to take any action at all.

Now, this week
there been the saga of the New Zealanders being held in Australian detention
camps prior to deportation here. Our response has been to send a text to the
Australians about what is going on. I am not standing up for Australian
criminals who happen to have been born in New Zealand, but the treatment being
meted out to them is excessive and out of line with the vaunted special relationship
between our two countries.

However, these
two incidents are not isolated cases. They are symptomatic of a general malaise
when it comes to standing up for human rights internationally. There is the
case of the New Zealander jailed in Myanmar for insulting the prophet Buddha,
or the case of the fugitive Qatari businessman evading imprisonment over the
deaths of the New Zealand triplets in the shopping centre fire a few years ago.
(And I shudder to think what efforts on his behalf the New Zealander currently
awaiting a potential death sentence in China on drugs charges might expect!)
Like the latest two examples, these cases all bear the hallmark of New Zealand
not wanting to become too involved, until public opinion demands it.

Why? The
prevailing view seems to be that as a small trading nation buffeted in the seas
of international economic uncertainty New Zealand cannot afford to upset, lest
existing markets be threatened, or potential new ones closed off. It explains,
but does not justify, the reason for soft-pedalling any criticism of Saudi
Arabia’s shocking human rights record, and our timidity on the case of the
Qatari businessman, because the greater prize of a potential free trade
agreement with the Gulf states might be put at risk. We remain quiet on Myanmar
for trade reasons too, and have been pathologically scared of saying critical
of China for years now.

While the pursuit
of enlightened self-interest is a legitimate foreign policy goal, it needs to
be balanced by some objectivity. In recent years though our foreign policy has
become too craven and trade-focussed and lacking a moral compass. In short, we have
become too silent, lest we cause offence.

But relying on quiet
words in diplomatic ears; nods and winks; pull-asides; text messages, or
whatever, is not the way to conduct foreign policy. We have a right to expect
our foreign policy to be evocative of our independence and nationhood by
upholding human rights and dignity, and to stand up for New Zealanders when and
where necessary. It is time to abandon the chin-dripping subservience we are
lapsing into.